- Quickdraw McLaw
- 34 Comments
- 204 Views
- US Supreme Court lifts federal ban on evictions. [SCOTUSblog]
- Renters are told not to panic. [Nevada Current]
- Former judge Richard Scotti will run for Nevada Secretary of State next year. [RJ]
- OnlyFans’ reversal on adult content leaves Nevada sex workers in limbo. [Las Vegas Sun]
- Sex-trafficked kids are crime victims. In Las Vegas, they still go to jail. [Washington Post]
You're Not in California.
Ok, I'll take the bait and give you my rant. People are coming to Nevada from California because the latter is such a mess, taxes, infrastructure, housing cost and all fueled by overregulation and a socialism bent.
Now those refugees from California whine and vote for the policies that they were used to in the PRC. Washoe and the other counties have kept their heads straighter, but Clark is fast becoming a mini California. To use a farm expression, the pigs are wallowing in the pond making the water undrinkable.
California gained over 2 million people over the last 10 years. A lot of people love the mess I guess.
California gains a lot of rich people and loses a lot of poor people each year. That is not what you would expect if rampant "socialism" or high taxes were the reason. It's the cost of housing that drives people out. I haven't seen any evidence of new Nevadans pushing for restrictive zoning or trying to kill density in Clark County or anywhere else.
I think your problem with the way Nevada votes now has nothing to do with taxes or housing policy, but is instead with cultural issues like gun control and police reform.
I think the not in california reference was a quote from the story on sex trafficking. The underage girl thinks she can't be arrested for prostitution because she is a minor. Officer says, You're not in california.
The democrats in this state are already talking of increasing property taxes and trying to repeal the constitutional ban on income taxes. This is not about California culture. It's about the same people moving here and imposing the same terrible policies they ran from. But yes, Nevada gets the worst of the Californians because that state's insane policies don't affect the wealthy as much as they do the middle and lower classes. Nevada is slowly deteriorating as a result of the CA outcasts who can't afford to live there. As far as zoning, how much more dense can this city get? New houses are even more on top of each other than even 10 years ago.
You got any data to back that up, OP? Prob not cause it makes no sense. Why would people move away from such a socialist hellhole that they hate only to vote for socialist hellhole policies and candidates? Chewbacca says it doesn't make sense.
There was an analysis of voter records in Washoe County that actually showed more GOP Californians were moving in than Democrat Californians. 36% R to 31% D to 33% other. I haven't seen something statewide, but I'd guess it's not too far off.
@10:56
California has lost a house of rep seat for the first time ever, net loss of population. People moving here are not from BH, Brentwood, Malibu or Newport. They are moving from formerly middle class areas such as San Bernardino, Bakersfield and Fresno. Look at our ever increasing sales tax in Clark County (currently 8.375). The highest combined rate in 1960 was 2%). Look at government growing more government, look at your property tax bill for the dollars going to CCSD and
the growing list of ancillary taxes added to the property tax bill. You have to drill down to see the creeping regulation and tax burdens. Consider that Clark County looks to new room taxes for funding. A tourist trip to Las Vegas used to be inexpensive. Not now.
We are incrementally losing the Nevada that was attractive for tourism, living and investment.
Then move to Idaho. Quit complaining because this is a blue state and you're not happy about it. We have zero income tax, that isn't changing, there is literally ZERO movement to change that and it requires a constitutional amendment anyways. We aren't defunding the police. Nobody is talking about universal health care. Maybe we take in some Afghani's, its the right thing to do anyways. But in the grand scheme of things, what does people moving into this state have to do with anything but home prices? And what's funny about that is most of the price manipulation has been from internet companies, Zillow, Redfin, etc. buying up the lower end homes and flipping them and large REIT's, mostly from Asia doing the same thing. You're just pushing a narrative you read from some wing nut on Facebook talking about how this state is going to shit. Newsflash, it isn't dummy. We're actually doing pretty well. Outside of the whole education thing.
That is the best comment that Ben Nadig has made on this blog. I too get tired of the uneducated bitching and moaning (usually directed at California transplants) that have no basis in reality. If you think Idaho is a better place to live than Las Vegas, well, you and I don't enjoy the same things. To add to Ben's list, good luck finding the same kind of high quality diverse restaurants in Idaho that we have here.
We're doing fairly well? Tell that the the already displaced renters due to increasing rent prices, which will only get worse the longer landlords are prevented from evicting non-paying tenants. Soon we'll have tent-lined streets, just like the Dreamland, California.
@ 1:38
That just means that those displaced renters will move to other states, like Idaho.
Scotti's choice to announce on he who shall not be named's radio show is all I need to hear about that. I'll be voting for ANYONE else.
I have made it a policy of mine that I will not vote for anyone who I deem to be serial runners, those who run for any office until they win. Can't win at his judgeship, just run for something else. I don't understand some people's incessant need to continuously run for various offices.
I will vote for Scotti over Nancy Allf.
To be fair Scotti ran for one political office in his life and won once and lost once. Hardly a serial candidate. He was chair of Clark County GOP but is an outlier in that party now. Secretary of State is not a ridiculous choice of office because frankly he has the chance to run the middle lane where Cegavske is now.
The good news for Scotti is that Cegavske's office is currently so disorganized it can take months to process an application for a notary public. Try calling the office and you could be on hold for an hour. Scotti could run on a promise to streamline and organize the mess. The bad news for Scotti is that the video of him screaming and throwing that book at the wall has gone viral. Oh yes, and he dismissed two DUI's right after defense "attorney" Craig Mueller gave him a $1500.00 campaign contribution.
I agree with 10:49 as to the kind of ruthless campaign that will be run against him.
But 10:49 appears to assume that a mass television ad campaign by Scotti's eventual democratic opponent could be devastating to Scotti(the ad would include the clip of him berating the juror, while cussing and throwing the pocket constitution, with an ominous voice over informing us of how supposedly shocking it all is).
But, relatively few people watch t.v. anymore, and the commercials can be avoided even if you watch t.v..
That said, there is all sorts of on line and electronic forms of advertising that we cannot totally escape, even if we no longer watch much television.
So, 10:49 may be right, to some extent, when insisting seeing such ad may be difficult to avoid.
And, yes, that will be the ad-the one 10:49 describes. We need not be in the political consulting field to realize that such, by necessity, will be the ad.
The democratic nominee is handed such a gift by having that video.
He's clearly not going to run in the "middle lane." He's already alluding to election fraud (i.e. the Big Lie) and he keeps appearing in Steve Sanson's show. That pretty much guarantees he's aiming for the tinfoil hat vote.
Agree with a lot of the points of 1:02, 1:22 and 10:49.
1:02's post is interesting and quite perceptive in that it distills the matter down to the main thematic attack from each side–Scotti is likely to run as a promised reformer of a governmental office he views as disorganized and inefficient, while his eventual opponent will run on the courtroom video and attempt to paint Scotti as an abusive, tyrannical bureaucrat.
But, if the campaign is primarily reduced to each side focusing on that one main theme, I believe the clear advantage would go to the democratic challenger(if viable and well-funded, that is).
The democratic nominee, would have at his/her disposal something very visceral, dramatic and visual–a very clear assault on the senses by an elected official apparently abusing a polite, respectful, presumably hard-working and honorable, nurse merely for saying she has seen so many children victims in her job that she might have difficulty being unbiased in a case involving horrific victimization of children.
Most people would relate to her, admire her and her candor, and view Scotti in an extremely negative light that makes them not just displeased and unimpressed with him, but actually quite angry and repulsed by him based on that video clip.(And it makes it worse that this perceived bully is attacking a female).
But Scotti's approach,attacking the current proficiency of the office(an office people don't know much about, and care even less),is a much more dull, detail-oriented undertaking. To many people it's a boring topic about some bureaucracy they don't know or care about.
Scotti's job would be keep it simple–attack it as really bad and inefficient(without getting sucked into the boring details of why it is bad), show how the office affects our everyday lives(focus on how the office oversees elections and that potential election fraud remains a serious issue to many voters) and then keep it simple, yet dramatic, about how a new broom sweeps clean and he will greatly improve operations and accountability.
2:05–I agree that any opponent will hit hard on that courtroom video.
But as for Scotti, not sure he intends to, or that he would be well-served by,taking the approach you say he will take–focusing on the details and operations of the office and how he will improve them.
And he may avoid that approach for the reason you mention–it is dull, boring, and no one knows or cares about the details of some governmental bureaucracy.
But I do agree that if he does take the approach you indicate, of attacking the office as currently ran, that he needs to present it in a way people care about–that S.O.S. oversees elections and we must guard against election fraud, etc.
That is something many voters seem to care about. But it's a much better issue for a Republican Primary. Once he is in the General Election, discussing voter fraud does not convert many democrats over to him. He would just be preaching to the choir–the Republicans who already support him and agree election fraud is a valid issue to guard against.
Allf's salary as a judge is about $250K per year, the Secretary of State is paid about $102K per year. Why would Allf want to run for the latter position?
2:14, in other words what you are saying that democrats don't believe voter fraud exists while republicans think it's rampant?
If that's true it is just another example of how polarized the two parties have become on all major issues.
Everything is reduced to extreme absolutes. Shades of gray cease to exist.
Scotti could also gut the efficacy of the video by addressing it head on.
"Look, I was having a bad day… I was wrong and out of line…What the video doesnt show is…..". Actually not that hard. Not like a BVD conviction or similar.
Don't discount the "Tin Foil Hat Vote". We are imminently stronger and vastly more numerous than you know or will ever admit.
So Richard Scotti is a hero to the "Tin Foil Hatters"? Nice to know.
In 2020, Allf made $187k and the SOS made $111k. It's public information. That's not much less money for a heck of a lot less work. Seems like a fair trade.
Voldemort has a radio show?
Former Judge Ricard Scotti running for Secretary Of State?
Turn off your televisions and other electronics in 2022 unless you want to watch a couple million dollars of television ads, from the democratic nominee for that position, whereby you endlessly see Judge Scotti in court, berating and swearing at the prospective juror(a female ER nurse, and thus a quite sympathetic figure), throwing the pocket constitution at the wall, etc.
The voice over of the ad will probably classify him as a "judicial bully" while conveniently letting you know that the abused prospective juror is a nurse who is essentially doing God's work helping injured and ill people, including many children, etc.
The ad will go on to tell us that the public wisely rejected this judicial bully and sent him packing in the last election, but here he is back again–to abuse more good people at taxpayer expense.
Now all that will be a great over-simplification, as well as a dramatically distorted view of him, as no one should be defined by their worst 30 seconds.
But he needs to recognize that in politics you often will be defined by your worst 30 seconds(as unfair as that might seem) and his worst thirty seconds is on video, and was broadly disseminated, and will blanket the airwaves next year.
So he better grow some really thick skin for next year.
“Apply for rental assistance, respond to all eviction notices by filing an ‘Answer’ with the court, include that you have a pending rental assistance application and elect mediation. You shouldn’t be evicted,” Bailey Bortolin, policy director for Nevada Legal Aid Services said on social media shortly after the court’s ruling was announced.
God have mercy on the landlords. The housing shortage is real. My decently cash flowing daughter cannot find an apartment, probably in part because all the freeloaders living for free. What kind of society prioritizes the unproductive non-contributors over the productive contributors?
What ever happened to Scotti dismissing those 2 DUI's for Craig Mueller after Mueller gave him a $1500.00 campaign contribution?
Jennifer Plumlee DUI case involving Mueller's $1500.00 campaign contribution to Scotti is on appeal to NSC oral argument has been scheduled.
One benefit of all of the Californians coming to Nevada and Nevada being a blue state, is the increased housing prices, which if you are a home owner, is a positive. If you are a renter, the blue state 'solutions' to housing have produced the opposite of the intended consequences, i.e., increased housing costs, not less.
As a small business owner, Nevada is becoming more expensive thanks to backdoor tax increases, but as I have said for many years, we are 20 years behind California. As a result, where California was in 2000, is Nevada 2020, and so we can expect California greatness of 2021 to find its way into southern Nevada (Las Vegas particularly, not Laughlin or small towns), by 2041. But then again, what do I know?
Rising housing prices only benefit homeowners who leave Nevada to move to a lower cost of living area. It hurts first time home buyers. And it's a wash for those who sell their house but stay in Nevada, as the new house they buy will have increased in value too in addition to paying higher property taxes due to increased value.
One of the primary reasons for the rapidly increasing housing prices is the result of the Federal Reserve easy money policies. The historically low interest rates do more to drive housing prices than just about any other factor. People, at least for the last 15 years have purchased based on payment, not value.
#freeadamlaxalt
#freebonniebulla
#freerichardscotti